Cited by 53Evaluation and Performance AssessmentNonprofit Sector and VolunteeringCommunity Development and Social Impact

Projected Sustainability of Innovative Social Programs

Savaya, Riki, Elsworth, Gerald, Rogers, Patricia·2009·Evaluation Review

Abstract

This study is an exploratory examination of the projected sustainability of more than 100 projects funded by the Australian government. Using data collected by the body that evaluated the projects and data from a government database, it examines the predictors of various forms of sustainability. Findings show that some two thirds of the project leaders who expected their programs to continue after the expiration of the initial funding expected them to continue with the same activities and target population; almost half envisioned them diversifying to new activities, target groups, or locations. Auspice organization involvement increased the expectation that the project would be continued, project effectiveness decreased that expectation, and diversity of initial funding became less important as other sources of support and sustainability were taken into consideration.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0193841x08322860

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Savaya, R., Elsworth, G., & Rogers, P.
Affiliations
  • Tel Aviv University (IL)
  • RMIT University (AU)
Venue
Evaluation Review
Published
2008-08-15
Volume
33
Issue
2
Pages
189-205
ISSN
  • 0145-4692 (ISSN-L)
  • 0193-841X
  • 1552-3926
OpenAlex
W1998826382
Cited by
53
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 5 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 1
FWCI
3.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Evaluation Review (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RMIT Research Repository (RMIT University Library) (submittedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Evaluation and Performance Assessment
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Nonprofit Sector and Volunteering
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Finance › Community Development and Social Impact
Keywords
program sustainability, social programs, project leaders, program diversification, program effectiveness, funding diversification, nonprofit organizations, program evaluation
MeSH terms
Australia, Diffusion of Innovation, Humans, Surveys and Questionnaires, Regression Analysis, Social Work, Program Evaluation, Multivariate Analysis, Databases, Factual

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review